We are again seeing fires break out at food processing facilities across the country. The media claims these incidents are a coincidence while there is much online speculation that these are acts of arson. Furthermore, it appears the globalists are making their moves to prohibit small and independent farming - there are major protests by farmers worldwide who can no longer tolerate the proposals for sustainability brought on by the UN and World Economic Forum. Synthetic and symbio foods are being pushed in favor of organic - we now stand at the crossroads of benefit and potential harm for our health. Tonight on Ground Zero, Clyde Lewis talks about THE SMELL OF BURNING DAIRY AIR.
SHOW SAMPLE:
SHOW TRANSCRIPT:
We are again seeing several fires breaking out in food processing facilities which is sparking some concern online.
The media claims that these incidents are coincidences and are being used by conspiracy theorists to prove that there is a plot to destroy facilities that provide meat and poultry to the populace.
There have been a few worth noting- like a fire that killed 100,000 chickens at a farm in Connecticut on January 28 and a fire in December that killed 250,000 chickens at a farm in Pennsylvania.
A recent fire at the Feather Crest Farms in Kurten Texas burned for days and was finally extinguished.
The 70-year-old farm began remodeling existing facilities and expanding production after being purchased by MPS Eggs in 2020, becoming one of the company’s six facilities across the United States.
Two Chicken houses went up in the blaze.
Over the years there have been a lot of fires and even cyber security breaches at both Chicken and beef farms across the country undefined is this all a big coincidence or is there intentional sabotage being carried out by green terrorists that wish to circumvent the way we process and distribute dairy foods and produce.
I have been receiving several troubling e-mails about how the globalists are making their moves all over Europe to prohibit average-day people from growing their own Gardens and there are also major protests underway from farmers who can no longer tolerate the proposals of sustainability brought on by the UN and World economic forum guidelines.
Farmers blocked the Dutch-Belgian border on Friday and occupied roads in Greece while their Polish peers announced plans to shut border crossings with Ukraine as protests for fairer prices and less red tape spread across Europe.
Farmersundefined protests have erupted in several countries, exposing anger about low prices for produce, rising costs, import of cheap foodstuffs and constraints imposed by the European Unionundefineds drive to fight climate change.
At one roadblock, Dutch pig farmer Johan Van Enckevort warned the European Union and Dutch politicians holding cabinet formation talks not to ignore farmersundefined needs.
The thing most disconcerting is that while the globalists have been talking about the threat of farming to the planet undefined you never really take them seriously undefined now they are serious and they are moving forward with their plans to starve the planet and then provide them with synthetic foods.
Before you say that these things are happening in Europe and why should I care undefined bear in mind that many things were happening during the COVID lockdowns where there were laws passed on a whim that prohibited home gardens and attempts to grow your food.
You may remember that Governor Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan used COVID-19 as an opportunity to institute some bizarre limitations on the public, including a mandate barring larger stores from selling seeds and garden supplies to customers. “If you’re not buying food or medicine or other essential items, you should not be going to the store,” Whitmer said when announcing her order. The Democratic governor was fine with purchases of lottery tickets and liquor, but not gardening tools and seeds.
She never gave a logical reason why she targeted garden supplies. Still, most people in the preparedness community understood very well what this was all about: This was a beta test for wider restrictions on food independence. There was widespread rhetoric in the media throughout 2020 attacking anyone stockpiling necessities as “hoarders,” and now they were going after people planning and trying to grow their food. The establishment did not want people to store or produce a personal food supply.
Another prospect that was being openly discussed among globalists was the idea that lockdowns were “helpful” in ways beyond stopping the spread of COVID-19 (the lockdowns were useless in stopping the spread of COVID-19). They suggested that these measures could be effective in preventing global carbon emissions and saving the world from “climate change.” The idea of climate lockdowns began to spread.
The corporate media has since lied about the existence of the climate lockdown agenda, but articles and white papers extolling the virtues of shutting down the planet in the name of climate change are easy to find and read.
The globalists and their academic defenders wanted permanent lockdowns, or rolling lockdowns every couple of months, shutting down most human activity and travel outside of basic production.
While the World Economic Forum was talking about how coffee farming contributes to Climate change undefined fact checkers all over the internet were trying to downplay what was said as only a suggestion.
But as we have seen they are not suggesting they are implementing.
For example, as we witnessed last year with a study from the Consumer Product Safety Commission on natural gas appliances, these little and obscure studies are often used to justify large-scale government interventions in people’s daily lives.
The CPSC study inspired months of debates from Democrats in the US demanding that gas appliances including stoves be banned because they might cause health side effects, specifically in children- it turns out the study had no concrete basis for this claim- and yet there are places like California where they are serious about banning gas stoves.
The Globalists have cited a study out of the University of Michigan which states homegrown foods produce five times more carbon emissions than industrial farming methods. In other words, private gardens could be considered a threat to the environment. The Telegraph and other corporate platforms have jumped on the story, and I believe this is cause for concern.
The study includes analysis of various gardens from individual family plots to urban and community plots and claims that “garden infrastructure” for individual plots (such as raised beds) contributes far greater carbon pollution than large-scale farming. The study seems to ignore the fact that raised beds are more efficient and grow more food in a smaller space.
The average person might be confused by this and assume the opposite is true – Wouldn’t growing foods at home be better for the environment? Not if your funding relies on portraying independent food supplies as bad for the planet. The study is bankrolled by a host of international groups, including the European Union’s Horizon Program which lists “100 Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities by 2030” as one of its project goals. These 100 cities are then supposed to act as flagship models for the eventual carbon agenda takeover of all cities by 2050.
Such groups have billions of dollars at their disposal and focus most of that monetary firepower on climate change research propaganda.
Globalists do not care about protecting your health; they care about how these studies can be used to fearmonger, thus increasing their power. In other words, if you can rig the science, then you can rig the laws.
We saw something similar to this in a UN study in 2006 which claimed that meat production contributed to nearly 20% of all carbon emissions and was worse for the environment than transportation. The study was exposed in 2010 as fraudulent, but for years the media and globalist organizations used its false conclusions as a springboard to demand limitations and bans on meat production in the name of saving the climate.
In Israel, the Health Ministry just announced the approval of synthetic beef for human consumption.
Permission for a “new food” product was given to Aleph Farms to sell its cultured meat in Israel.
Aleph Farms cultivated thin-cut steak. (Courtesy)
In a world first, Israel has approved the sale of cultured meat based on beef, the Health Ministry said Wednesday.
Permission for a “new food” product was given to Aleph Farms to sell its cultured meat in Israel.
Singapore and the US have previously approved cultured chicken for sale, but Israel is the first to give beef the go-ahead.
The ministry said the approval came as part of a pilot program for alternative protein carried out by the Department of Food Risk Management at the ministry’s National Food Service. It said that in light of the growing global demand for “products of non-living origin” it is working to approve alternative food sources.
In a statement, Aleph Farms said the ministry in December issued it a “no questions” letter for its Aleph Cuts brand, meaning the product is recognized as safe.
Aleph Farms CEO Didier Toubia welcomed the development, saying that “addressing common challenges such as food security will be the best way to ensure the prosperity of the Middle East region, as well as other regions around the world that are significantly dependent on food imports, with an emphasis on Asia.”
It hopes to roll out its Black Angus Petit Steak later this year, according to Hebrew media reports.
A start-up company called undefinedBored Cowundefined is now selling synthetic milk online as well.
The fake milk, sold by Bored Cow, uses a wannabe whey protein – undefinedmicrofloraundefined called undefinedProFermundefined made by their partner Perfect Day, “a consumer biology company on a mission to create a kinder, greener tomorrow by developing new ways to make the foods you love today — starting in the dairy aisle.”
They claim their product is a new kind of undefinedanimal-freeundefined milk alternative undefinedmade with real milk protein from fermentation.undefined
Health Research Institute (HRI), a nonprofit independent lab based in Fairfield, Iowa examined multiple samples of Bored Cowundefineds undefinedoriginalundefined flavor milk using mass spectrometry to test the claim that the synthetic protein it contained was the same as real milk protein. HRI compared these results to samples of natural milk from grass-fed cows.
Their testing revealed 92 unknown molecules — and a fungicide — in undefinedsyntheticundefined milk protein used by more than a dozen food brands sold in common grocery chains.
The ingredients listed for Bored Cowundefineds undefinedoriginalundefined flavor are:
undefinedWater, animal-free whey protein (from fermentation), sunflower oil, sugar, less than 1% of vitamin A, vitamin B12 (cyanocobalamin), vitamin D2, riboflavin, citrus fiber, salt, dipotassium phosphate, acacia, gellan gum, mixed tocopherols (antioxidant), calcium potassium phosphate citrate, natural flavor.undefined
This is a brew made with sorcery and mostly genetically modified garbage, starting with the sunflower oil which is an inflammatory seed oil that may be genetically modified as well. Meanwhile, the label does not specify whether the whey protein was produced through the genetic engineering of yeast. Also, the main input for fermentation is sugar — and theyundefinedre using high fructose corn syrup, which is also a GMO product. It’s all gross and phony.
Aside from the host of unknown compounds, synthetic milk lacked many important micronutrients found in natural milk such as an omega-3 fatty acid, vitamin E, and some B vitamins. Additionally, forms of carnitine that are undefinedreally important for energy metabolismundefined were either missing or only present in trace amounts in the synbio product.
There were 69 important nutrients present in natural cowundefineds milk, most of which were completely absent in synbio milk. A few were present in small or trace amounts,undefined according to HRIundefineds Chief Scientist and CEO John Fagan, Ph.D. Fagan — a molecular biologist and former cancer researcher at the National Institutes of Health — has been a worldwide pioneer in testing genetically modified organisms GMOs.undefined
Additionally, only eight compounds were identifiable. The rest were undefineduncharacterizedundefined by scientific literature.
undefinedThe 92 unknown molecules we found have never been studied by scientists. So we donundefinedt know whether theyundefinedre safe or dangerous, whether they are nutrients or toxins.undefined
Drink up undefined this is for the sustainability goals. Where is the nutrition? There isnundefinedt any undefined this is another way to starve a population.
The Bored Cow samples also contained an agricultural fungicide called Benthiavalicarb-isopropyl, another unpronounceable toxin that somehow is okay to consume according to global greenhouse gas bags.
These results contradict Perfect Dayundefineds claim that its product — used by Bored Cow — is undefinedidentical to what cows make.undefined
Claiming the proteins are “molecularly identical to those produced by cows” is a lie.
Current federal law does not require products that contain ProFerm to be labeled as bioengineered or as containing GMOs. The Non-GMO Project states that Synbio products go undefinedunlabeled and unregulated in the marketplace.undefined
The FDA does not carry out, commission, or require mandatory safety testing of GMOs that are entering the human food supply. Certain GMOs are regulated by other government agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or the U.S. Department of Agricultureundefineds Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), based on potential environmental impacts. The FDA only looks at voluntary pre-market research that is designed and conducted by the companies making GMO products.
On March 25, 2020, the FDA sent Perfect Day a undefinedno-questionsundefined letter that classified ProFerm as undefinedGenerally Recognized as Safe.undefined
Given that Perfect Dayundefineds fermentation process does use GMOs, it is unclear how the FDA concluded the product could be undefinedgenerally regarded as safe.undefined
The globalists day by day creep in to control every aspect of our lives and now we have to read the labels of dairy and poultry to figure out if we are being fed a stew of toxins and bug parts.
Why the obsessive focus on food? Because if people have their food, then they might be more willing to rebel against further mandates. It’s really that simple. The end game is obvious – Control the food, and you control the world. Do it in the name of saving the planet and a lot of people will even thank you as you starve them.
Again undefined I wonder if anyone who is convinced that Climate change exists supports the idea of destroying the farms and the nutritious vegetables and proteins they give us.
Farming has been around for millennia and no one until now has vilified farmers. People who are in the right mind do not vilify produce or vilify proteins essential for health.
Green climate cult groups and lobbyists seem to be pushing forward without being stopped.
Thousands of farmers and ranchers are losing their industries to radical environmental policies supported and promoted by such groups. Hypocrisy runs deep in the leftist Green movement.
Sustainability -That’s the trigger word driving the attack on farming. Green activists say we face an impending apocalypse and so society, they warn, must pursue a stated goal of achieving “sustainable development” or all will be lost. “Sustainable development” determines how food will be grown, processed, packaged, and marketed.
Very specific rules determined what kind of crops may be grown, and how much land may be used for that purpose, while much of a farm’s private property is forced into open space for habitat, wetlands, and “supposedly endangered species.
However, farmland is under attack across the nation, mainly under the guise of climate change.
John Kerry has accused small farms of being significant emitters of nitrogen. Of course, this is the primary attack on cattle for their burps, flatulence, and manure.
The current term is “Climate Smart.” As sustainable development forces higher costs on the farmers, Biden’s massive inflation makes it nearly impossible for farmers to stay afloat.
While the Biden cabal is pushing to maneuver it all into place, the real driving force is being driven by the World Economic Forum and its Great Reset agenda. The WEF has launched something called its New Vision for Agriculture initiative, which it defines as a “roadmap for Stakeholders.” Stakeholders are not farmers, property owners, or others in the agriculture industry. They are Non-governmental organizations many of whom have been working directly with the United Nations for decades to direct climate change policy.
Now add the funds of private foundations such as the Rockefellers, Blackrock, and Gates Foundation, then the true road map of those stakeholders and their funders begins to emerge. These forces are NOT protectors of the environment; they are destroyers of it and our current living standards.
The age of synthetic or symbio foods is now beginning undefined the window of changing the way we eat has opened and the goal year for sustainability goals is 2030.
The goal is to stop meat consumption and replace it with the fake meat now being offered by Bill Gates and others.
Synthetic foods, produced using artificial or chemical methods, stand at the crossroads of benefit and potential harm to human health.
They hold the promise of combating food shortages and enhancing nutritional intake, thus playing a crucial role in our well-being. Moreover, their production is less dependent on natural resources like land and water, which can lead to improved environmental sustainability.
However, the phrase undefinedGood for us or Killing us Slowlyundefined aptly summarizes the lingering uncertainties about these foods. The long-term effects of their consumption remain largely unknown, leading to fears that certain synthetic ingredients could slowly damage our health. Along with these health concerns, there are also ethical issues and cultural acceptance challenges tied to synthetic food production and consumption.
Hence, while the benefits of synthetic foods are appealing, it is essential to continue rigorous research to ensure their safety and long-term impacts on health.
